Editor’s Note: Part 1, which appeared in Quarter 3 UV+EB Technology, discussed how EB and UV were practical and sustainable solutions for the coil coating industry. Part 3 will continue with the challenges in incorporating EB and UV into the coil coating process.
An Economical Solution
Energy savings
Sustainable solutions have value to both the environment and society, but when they also bring monetary value to a company, that often provides a straighter path toward implementation. For EB and UV, the reduction in energy consumption that contributes to the technologies’ green status also furnishes substantial savings. The value of these savings will vary with location and the relative cost of electricity to natural gas. In the US, the average electricity cost for June of 2025 is reported as 12.89¢ per kWh, and the average natural gas cost is estimated as $14.57 per thousand cubic feet or 4.97¢ per kWh. 1-2 Assuming 5,000 hours of operation per year and using the results in Part 1, Figure 1 3-4, the estimated energy savings are ~$2.6 million (natural gas oven vs. EB/UV + gloss control).
The ease with which EB and UV can be turned off likely translates to further energy savings since ovens commonly are kept on, albeit at reduced temperatures, to avoid starting up production with a cold oven. For instance, if an oven is kept at half power compared to an EB/UV system that is off (with minimal power draw for auxiliary functions), it is a cost difference of approximately $3,000 every 10 hours.
For steel and aluminum destined for the European Union, additional savings will be realized in 2026 once enforcement of the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) begins. 5 The CBAM seeks to encourage low-carbon footprint production of goods by imposing import tariffs – the price of which is based on the greenhouse gas emissions associated with the product, the market price of carbon in the EU and whether any carbon tax was charged in the country of origin. The CO2 equivalent savings for EB/UV coil-coated steel, as a result of the difference in energy consumption, is approximately 90%.
In the case of EB, the cost of high-purity nitrogen must be factored into the operating costs. The volume of nitrogen required will depend on the line speed, beam width and beam design, but a rough estimate of 3x the beam’s electricity cost is typical. Some steel companies already may have access to nitrogen for use in galvanization. Maintenance costs between technologies have been estimated by RADSYS to be similar, favoring EB/UV by a few thousand dollars per year over thermal processes. 4
Paint considerations
One operating cost that is not expected to favor EB/UV is paint. Conventional paints and primers are well established and widely used. In contrast, EB/UV coil paints are a newer technology, and investments into research and development still are being made. Limited adoption of these paints also means relatively small volumes currently. As the technology matures in the steel and aluminum industries and volumes grow, the price of EB/UV paints is expected to decrease in the long term. A positive indication of growth in this area over the last couple of years is the involvement of several of the large paint providers, including Sherwin Williams, PPG, Beckers and Akzo Nobel. 6-7 Competition breeds innovation, diversity of offerings and fair prices.
While a higher price is expected for now, be careful to compare paints based on their coverage and not the initial volume. For example, an EB/UV paint may be priced at $3 per gallon and a conventional, solvent-based paint at $1 per gallon. The EB/UV paint cost is not 3x the solvent-based paint, however, because, at 50% solvent, it takes twice the volume to achieve the same dry film thickness as the EB/UV paint, which has no evaporative fraction. Properly compared based on coverage, the EB/UV paint actually is 1.5x the cost of the solvent-based paint in this example. It currently is estimated that EB/UV paint ranges from ~1.2 to 1.5x the cost of a solvent-based paint. 4 Additionally, not having to haul and store solvent also should help to offset the higher cost.
Capital cost
Over the long lifespan of these coil coating lines, capital cost may not be as impactful as the day-to-day operating costs, but a new line is a substantial investment nonetheless. A detailed capital cost comparison between conventional and EB/UV technologies is outside the scope of this article; however, there is one general consideration to keep in mind when assessing an investment: the monetary savings of switching technologies should not be evaluated by comparing the curing sections of a new line alone.
The near instantaneous cure of EB (milliseconds) and short cure time of UV (seconds) also affects the footprint of the line – what size building is required and the size of the accumulators. The lack of solvents and high temperatures influences infrastructure requirements – no oxidizers, no water quench or subsequent treatment of the water and no explosion-proofing of the line or building are necessary. These factors illustrate the need to be comprehensive in comparing capital investments, but also mindful of circumstance – a new line may not be going into a new building, for instance, but perhaps two EB/UV lines can fit where one conventional line sat before.
A Safety Solution
There are inherent dangers working in the coil coating industry despite companies cultivating a safety culture. High strip tensions, sharp edges and heavy coils are just a few of the hazards that cannot be avoided. Some safety threats, though, can be reduced or eliminated by switching to EB and UV technologies. For example, there is no need for the high oven temperatures, which can cause burns and can contribute to instances of heat exhaustion and heat stroke in the height of summer. Eliminating solvent removes potential health risks associated with inhaling VOCs and the potential fire and explosion risk of flammable liquids and vapors.
Rad-cure coatings are not free of hazards. 8 It is common for them to be listed as a skin and eye irritant, and appropriate PPE, training and safe workplace practices still are necessary. The low vapor pressure of most EB- and UV-curable materials, however, means inhalation is not a common route of exposure as it is with solvent-based materials. In addition, EB/UV materials are not known to be carcinogenic below a maximum tolerated dose, nor are they mutagenic, whereas solvent, as a class, contains known and suspected carcinogens as well as materials toxic to the liver, kidneys and human reproduction.
There also are safety hazards with EB and UV equipment that are not found with thermal ovens. 9 While these hazards may be new to coil coaters, they have been successfully handled for decades in other industries. Both UV light and the accelerated electrons generated by EB are forms of radiation, present in operation and not present when powered off. Just as with the sun, operators should not look directly into a UV light, and skin exposure should be limited. Light shields protect workers from direct UV exposure. Low-energy beams (≤300 kV, the type used for coil coating) also are self-shielded. The accelerated electrons and the x-rays they produce as a byproduct are contained within the system, and safety interlocks prevent operation of the system if any of the shielding is not in place. EBs used for curing are inerted with nitrogen; nitrogen makes up 78% of air and excess nitrogen from the beam is not a danger in large, open, well-ventilated areas, but oxygen monitoring is needed in smaller, enclosed spaces.
An Enabling Solution
What processes cannot be accomplished, what applications or industries cannot be served today because conventional coil coating makes it not practical, not financially viable or not possible? Unencumbered by the limitations of heat and solvent, where can coil coating be used tomorrow? Does coating without a peak metal temperature enable the use of other steel alloys and/or the ability to achieve different mechanical properties? What additives can be included in rad-cure formulations that normally would vaporize at conventional coating temperatures? Does requiring less infrastructure make the EB/UV coil coating process more accessible to smaller companies? Does the ability to stop and start with minimal waste enable shorter runs, more custom coatings and/or the incorporation of other technologies (e.g., digital printing, Cast and CureTM)?
Ponder the possibilities, think outside the proverbial box and question what is known to be ‘true’ about coil coating because the qualities that separate EB/UV from conventional thermal processing will provide pathways that did not exist before. EB also can do so much more than cure paints; it can cure laminating adhesives and sterilize and crosslink and change surface properties through grafting.
And as versatile as the technology is, so too is the diversity of materials at its disposal. Acrylates are an expansive category of pre-polymer and polymeric materials that have a wide range of properties; the acrylate functional group can be synthesized onto common chemical moieties to form, for example, polyester acrylates, urethane acrylates and epoxy acrylates. 10 Endless possibilities may be hyperbole, but suffice to say that there are a great many opportunities to be discovered.
Acknowledgements: Thank you to David Cocuzzi (NCCA), Marc Minon (RADSYS) and Pauline Maillot (Beckers Group) for their insights and contributions.
Sage Schissel, Ph.D.
Applications Specialist
PCT Ebeam and Integration LLC
sage.schissel@pctebi.com
References:
- Electricity Rates. Electric Choice. Accessed June 2025. https://www.electricchoice.com/electricity-prices-by-state/
- Ritchie, C., Natural Gas Rates by State. Choose Energy. Accessed June 2025. https://www.chooseenergy.com/data-center/natural-gas-rates-by-state/
- Schissel, S., EB and UV for Coil Coating: Solutions, Challenges and Managing the Transition, Part 1. UV+EB Tech. (3) 2025.
- RADSYS spreadsheet. Contact Marc Minon at info@radsys.eu for more information.
- Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism. Taxation and Customs Union. https://taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu/carbon-border-adjustment-mechanism_en
- Swanson, K., Parish, W., The Future of Metal: Electron Beam for Coil Coating. National Coil Coaters Association, Fall Technical Meeting, September 2022.
- AkzoNobel and China’s Wuxi El Pont Explore the Use of Electron Beams. Paint & Coatings Industry. December 11, 2023.
- Golden, R., Safety and Handling of UV/EB Curing Materials. RadTech. 2010. https://radtech.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/Safety-and-Handling-of-UVEB-Curing-Materials.pdf
- UV and EB Equipment Safety Topics. RadTech. 2010. https://radtech.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/UVEB-Equipment-Safety-Topics.pdf
- Arceneaux, J., Printers’ Guide: UV&EB Chemistry and Technology. RadTech. 2016. https://radtech.org/archive/images/printers-guide-new/ChemistryPrimer_2016update_PROOF.pdf
